Paul, you quoted the weakest point in a piece rife w/ flaws: conflating science/math/CS; leaping from correlation to causation; cherry-picking data to fit a provocative thesis. It buried the finding that “girls performed as well or better than boys on science in most countries.”
-
-
-
What do you mean, "buried"? It's central to the argument. I almost shudder to ask what you think the thesis is.
- Još 11 drugih odgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
The Stoet / Geary paper this article is based on is, IMO, weak-ish. I went back to the original data and plotted it in full below. R^2 is less than 0.1. Also, female graduation rate is GGGI component, which confounds correlation.pic.twitter.com/0YN4AomXbc
- Još 4 druga odgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
Hope people don't interpret this to mean we shouldn't make an effort to encourage girls to study STEM. Consider 15% US *male* graduates had STEM degrees, which compared to Finland/Norway's 20% female graduates with STEM degrees, seems their societies do provide more opportunity
- Još 1 odgovor
Novi razgovor -
-
-
Jordan Peterson made this point in a debate
-
He's made the point in many debates and they hate his guts for it
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
Honestly, the finding best supported by the white knighting in the replies is that reading ability is not a standard relative strength for males
- Još 1 odgovor
Novi razgovor -
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.